Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson proposed that the U.S. federal court could be refunded, restructured or eliminated as a way to oppose a judicial decision that challenged Donald Trump’s policies.
Speaking to reporters on Tuesday, Johnson, a former constitutional lawyer, raised the prospects for Congressional intervention in the court system.
“You know, you have the power over federal courts. You can eliminate the entire district court,” Johnson said.
Johnson later made it clear that his remarks were intended to explain Congress’ broad constitutional powers rather than a direct threat, but trace pressure from Trump’s allies to challenge the independence of the judicial.
Republican lawmakers have been more visible dissatisfied with federal judges who blocked the Trump administration’s actions, particularly regarding immigration policy.
One particular point of their rage is US District Judge James Boasberg. He recently issued a nationwide injunction preventing the deportation of Venezuelan immigrants. Since then, Trump has called on Boasberg to Flame each for his decision, and has received calls for several House Republicans to introduce Flame each article against other judges who have issued a national injunction similar to his.
Article 3 of the US Constitution has the power to establish a sub-course federal court in Congress, and there is a historic precedent. Congress previously excluded courts, such as the 1913 commercial court. House Attorney Jim Jordan also suggests that several legislative moves are being investigated based on potential job seeking constraints.
But it can almost fail, given the expected resistance from some Republicans and the almost essential resistance to gaining ample support in the Senate where seven Democrats have to waive the vote. Missouri Republican Sen. Josh Hawley said taking that direction on judicial reform would only exacerbate the potential court backlog, “My view is that I want to have more Republican judges on the bench.”
One other approach that Republicans are seeing is a House bill next week by California Republican representative Darrell Issa.
Johnson described this as a “dramatic improvement” to the federal court system, arguing that such an injunction violates the separation of power.
“We have the authority to fund the courts and all of these things,” Johnson told reporters. “But times are calling for hopeless measures and Congress is about to act.”
